# Oakland Unified School District v. Olicker

> California Court of Appeal · June 8, 1972 · 25 Cal. App. 3d 1098

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9728772

## Case

- **Full name:** OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT OF ALAMEDA COUNTY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EILEEN BARBARA ROTH OLICKER, Defendant and Appellant
- **Court:** California Court of Appeal
- **Decided:** June 8, 1972
- **Citations:** 25 Cal. App. 3d 1098; 102 Cal. Rptr. 421; 1972 Cal. App. LEXIS 1103
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Sims
- **Judges:** Molinari, Sims, Elkington
- **Cited by:** 16 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9728772

## Opinion text

SIMS, J.
I concur. In joining what is the majority opinion in this case in the face of the vigorous dissent of my esteemed colleague, I would point out that the trial court found on sufficient evidence that the teacher was not guilty of immoral conduct. It is improper therefore to confuse the teacher, who is attempting to cope with vulgarity and obscenity which her pupils absorbed elsewhere, with those who are responsible for the. only frame of reference in which the pupils chose to express themselves. If standards of taste of future generations are to be elevated it will not be accomplished by those who seek to sweep distasteful matters under the rug, or by self-embarrassed school trustees who discharge as unfit those who would bring the problem out in the open for discussion.
We should also consider that in this world there are many cultures and many concepts of what is acceptable sexual conduct, and of what sexual conduct may be the subject of free and open discussion or publication in folklore or literature. It may be impossible to impose one strict moral code on all of society, and we may have to acquaint ourselves with, and accept, without puritanical prudery, as natural to them, the standards of others.
*1113 No one, including the teacher involved, condones her action in exposing to this material those pupils, if any, who had not already heard, if not absorbed, the language of the environment in which generations of bondage and discrimination forces them to live. Nevertheless, the fact that a month went by uneventfully after the publication of the material evidences that her fitness to teach had not been appreciably impaired by her admitted indiscretion. It cannot be said that she was free to do what she wanted without fear of discipline or restraint. She exercised the latter when she collected and destroyed the papers. Her probationary status left her subject to termination at the end of the year if her employers were dissatisfied with her bold and imaginative methods of teaching. Under the circumstances, however, the trial court was not warranted in branding her for the rest of her life as displaying “evident unfitness for service” in her chosen profession.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9728772. Public record. Not legal advice.